On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Moritz Lennert <mlenn...@club.worldonline.be> wrote: > [taking this over to grass-dev] > > On 05/02/15 18:23, Markus Metz wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Moritz Lennert >> <mlenn...@club.worldonline.be> wrote: >>> >>> On 05/02/15 14:49, Markus Metz wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Moritz Lennert >>>> <mlenn...@club.worldonline.be> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 05/02/15 10:06, Markus Metz wrote: > > >>>>>> v.generalize does not distinguish between outer and inner rings, it >>>>>> simply goes through all boundaries and generalizes each one. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> And this has always been the case or this is specific to GRASS7 ? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This has always been the case. >>> >>> >>> >>> Then why doesn't there seem to be any generalization happening for the >>> hole >>> boundaries of the test dataset with grass64release ? >> >> >> With the test dataset you provided, GRASS 6.4 does generalize the hole >> boundaries. I do not have the problem vector of Robert, so I can not >> say if the hole boundaries in that vector are generalized or not. > > > With a make distleaned, svn updated and recompiled grass64relase, using the > test data and the commands > > v.generalize test method=douglas thresh=100 out=test_gen_100 --o > v.generalize test method=douglas thresh=500 out=test_gen_500 --o > > I get the attached result (red = 100, orange=500). I don't see any > generalization in the holes as I do with the same commands in GRASS 7.
Hmm, I do get generalization of the holes in G64 (no local changes). g.version -g version=6.4.5svn revision=64438M date=2015 black: original, red: thresh=100, green: thresh=500 Markus M
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev